Article image

The Unseen Cost of Conservation

Wednesday, 12 November 2025 02:31

Summary

The global effort to finance forest conservation as a climate solution is increasingly exposing a fundamental tension between international capital and the land rights of Indigenous communities. Across the Amazon, Southeast Asia, and West Africa, a 'green gold rush' for carbon credits has led to opaque deals, legal disputes, and a pattern of violence against forest defenders. In Brazil, the trial for the killing of an Indigenous guardian remains stalled after six years, symbolising a broader impunity, while in Malaysia, Indigenous groups have secured a temporary halt to palm oil clearing on disputed land. The promise of climate finance, such as Indonesia's pledge to recognise customary forests, is often met with skepticism due to a history of stalled reforms and state-backed development projects. While a new carbon agreement in Sierra Leone offers a model for 'carbon justice' with equitable revenue sharing and community consent, the overall landscape remains defined by a stark imbalance: Indigenous Peoples, who are the most effective stewards of the world's remaining forests, receive less than one per cent of global climate finance.

The Green Gold Rush and the Carbon Cowboys of the Amazon

The vast, carbon-rich forests of the Amazon basin have become the epicentre of a new, volatile market, attracting entities seeking to capitalise on the global demand for carbon credits. This phenomenon, which some Indigenous leaders have termed a 'green gold rush,' has led to a wave of dubious deals on Indigenous lands across Brazil and Bolivia. Companies, often lacking the necessary financial or technical expertise, have signed contracts with communities, granting them exclusive rights to trade the ecosystem services provided by millions of hectares of forest. These agreements are frequently opaque, can last for up to a century, and are sometimes written in English, creating a significant power imbalance with the local communities. In Brazil, federal prosecutors have taken action to annul a $180 million carbon credit deal in the state of Pará, which was intended to sell 12 million credits to major corporations. The legal challenge asserts that the credits were presold illegally under Brazil’s 2024 carbon market law and, crucially, that Indigenous and Quilombola communities were not properly consulted as required by international law. Community members fear that such programmes could restrict their access to their traditional lands and disrupt their customary ways of life. The Brazilian government’s Indigenous affairs agency, Funai, had previously warned that Indigenous territories were facing a second wave of questionable carbon proposals. Furthermore, the Federal Public Ministry maintains that, without government authorisation, companies have no right to carbon credits associated with Indigenous territories, and the residents themselves lack the legal right to sell or give them away. This regulatory vacuum has allowed what critics call 'carbon pirates' to operate, preying on traditional communities and potentially privatising communal lands under the guise of environmental protection. The issue is not confined to Brazil; in July 2024, the Constitutional Court in Colombia annulled a carbon credit deal in the Pira Parana territory of the Amazon. The ruling followed claims from six local tribes that the agreement, which required them to preserve an area comparable in size to Puerto Rico, was signed without their free, prior, and informed consent. The court mandated that the tribes’ legitimate representatives must meet within six months to decide on a new agreement, or the project must be terminated. This landmark decision underscored the growing global scepticism regarding the effectiveness and ethical integrity of carbon credits, particularly when they fail to genuinely benefit the communities who are the primary stewards of the forest.

A Model for Carbon Justice in Sierra Leone

While the Amazonian experience highlights the pitfalls of unregulated carbon finance, a contrasting model has emerged in West Africa, offering a potential blueprint for equitable climate deals. In Sierra Leone, communities in the Sittia chiefdom of the Bonthe district have signed a carbon agreement with the Africa Conservation Initiative (ACI) that is explicitly based on 'carbon justice principles'. This agreement focuses on protecting approximately 79,000 hectares of mangroves in the Sherbro River Estuary, which constitutes roughly half of the country’s mangrove forests. The core of the 'carbon justice' approach is a commitment to fair participation and financial transparency. The Bonthe communities are set to receive a substantial 40 to 50 per cent share of the gross revenue generated from the sale of carbon credits. This revenue-sharing model is a significant departure from profit-sharing arrangements in other projects, which can be complicated by developers reinvesting profits and communities lacking access to financial records to determine actual returns. The principles also mandate free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC), with the 'informed' component specifically requiring the disclosure of all financial information throughout the project’s life cycle. Furthermore, the project is designed to reduce community dependency on mangrove wood by offering alternatives, such as efficient cookstoves, fish-smoking ovens, and access to capital for planting timber woodlots. This approach is seen as a breakthrough in aligning climate finance with community rights and leadership. However, the carbon market landscape in Sierra Leone is not uniformly positive; a separate investigation in May 2024 raised serious doubts about the legality of a controversial carbon offset project involving large-scale tree plantations. That investigation found that numerous farming families who owned the land had allegedly not agreed to the project in the manner prescribed by law, which requires the written consent of 60 per cent of a landowning family and full prior information about the project. This earlier case underscores the fragility of community rights when legal stipulations are not rigorously enforced, even as the Sittia agreement demonstrates a path toward a more just system.

The Impunity of Violence Against Forest Guardians

The struggle for land rights and forest protection is often a matter of life and death for Indigenous communities, particularly in the Amazon. The case of the Indigenous forest guardian Paulo Paulino Guajajara in Brazil exemplifies the chronic impunity that surrounds violence against environmental defenders. Paulo Paulino Guajajara was killed, and his colleague Laércio Guajajara was wounded, in an alleged ambush by illegal loggers in the Arariboia Indigenous Territory in Maranhão state on November 1, 2019. Nearly six years later, the trial for the two suspects charged in the crimes has been delayed again, now pushed to early 2026. The judge’s advisory staff cited insufficient time for the trial to be held by the end of the current year, despite a long-awaited anthropological report on the collective damages to the community being concluded and attached to the case in August. The father of the deceased guardian expressed profound frustration, noting that the criminals who killed his son had never been convicted or arrested. This prolonged delay is viewed by Indigenous rights advocates as emblematic of Brazil’s systemic failure to protect those who defend the forest, sending a dangerous message that such violence will be tolerated. The Guajajara people, who have long fought to protect their ancestral lands from illegal logging, continue to face threats, with their community’s collective will often serving as the only defence against encroachment. In Colombia, the situation is similarly perilous; of the 1,411 human rights defenders killed over the past decade, at least 70 were Indigenous guards. In many protected zones in the Colombian Amazon, the state has withdrawn, leaving 11 areas inaccessible to park rangers due to armed conflict. Despite the violence and lack of resources, forests within Indigenous territories in Colombia remain largely intact, with 98 per cent cover, a testament to the effectiveness of Indigenous stewardship.

The Contradictions of Conservation in Southeast Asia

In Southeast Asia, the tension between economic development and forest protection is acutely felt, particularly in the palm oil sector and through government-led conservation pledges. In Sarawak, Malaysian Borneo, Indigenous Penan and Kenyah residents of the Long Urun region achieved a cautious, temporary victory in late October 2025 when the palm oil firm Urun Plantations agreed to a moratorium on clearing land in a disputed area. The communities had alleged that the plantation, which holds a sustainable certification, was clearing natural forest in violation of its lease and the Malaysia Sustainable Palm Oil (MSPO) standard. The MSPO standard prohibits the conversion of natural forest to oil palm after December 31, 2019. Satellite imagery and evidence from non-governmental organisations indicated ongoing deforestation since 2023, while the company maintained that any clearing was within legal guidelines and involved only replanting previously developed land. The communities’ actions, which included periodic blockades starting in late 2024 and a formal complaint to the MSPO Board, led to a palm oil mill suspending the purchase of fruit from the plantation, which in turn prompted the company to pause development activities. This dispute highlights the growing conflict in Sarawak over the expansion of palm oil into remaining forests and Indigenous territories. Meanwhile, in Indonesia, the government’s latest promise to recognise 1.4 million hectares of Indigenous and customary forests by 2029 has been met with deep skepticism from rights advocates. The pledge, announced in November 2025, would quadruple the area of officially recognised customary forests in the country, which holds the world’s third-largest tropical rainforest. However, activists view the commitment as another unfulfilled promise, citing years of stalled reforms, including a long-delayed Indigenous Rights Bill. The bureaucratic process for formal recognition has been so slow that less than two per cent of the 23 million hectares mapped by Indonesia’s Indigenous land registry currently have legal status. The contradiction is compounded by the fact that roughly one quarter of Indigenous territories overlap with logging, oil and gas, or mining concessions, and state-backed 'strategic national projects' continue to drive land grabs and forest loss. Critics argue that without bold legal reforms, the 1.4-million-hectare target will focus on 'low-hanging fruit'—areas without corporate overlaps—and fail to unlock recognition at the necessary scale.

The Global Disconnect in Climate Finance

The recurring conflicts over land, carbon, and conservation underscore a profound global disconnect in climate finance. Indigenous Peoples and local communities are widely recognised as the most effective stewards of the world’s forests, governing 39 per cent of global lands that remain in good ecological condition. They are responsible for managing 17 per cent of all forest carbon and contribute to the conservation of 25 per cent of the world’s carbon sinks. Despite this critical role, these communities receive less than one per cent of the total climate finance allocated globally. This financial imbalance is particularly striking when considering the economic effectiveness of securing land rights. Studies have shown that investing in secure land rights for Indigenous communities in the Amazon is one of the most cost-effective ways to combat climate change, with the costs of securing Indigenous lands for 20 years amounting to at most one per cent of the derived benefits. For example, projects priced at a modest US$3 to US$11 per hectare can lead to communities receiving land title and registration documents that protect their rights and ability to manage their lands for generations. The global community has made some commitments, such as the Glasgow pledge for $1.7 billion to fund the forest tenure rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. However, this progress is often overshadowed by the systemic economic and legal incentives that continue to obstruct the basic needs and sovereignty of these communities. Governments worldwide, for instance, drive more than $7 trillion in direct and indirect subsidies to fossil fuels, agriculture, and fisheries, a figure more than ten times the global biodiversity financing gap. The International Indigenous Peoples Forum on Climate Change has noted that many 'Just Transition'-branded activities are being carried out on Indigenous Peoples’ lands without their free, prior, and informed consent, suggesting that these activities cannot truly be defined as a transition from 'business as usual'.

Conclusion

The global climate crisis has placed the world’s remaining forests at the centre of a complex, high-stakes negotiation, one that pits the urgent need for carbon mitigation against the long-denied rights of the people who protect them. The case studies from the Amazon, Sierra Leone, Malaysia, and Indonesia reveal a pattern of systemic risk where the pursuit of 'green gold' often replicates the extractive injustices of the past. The failure to secure justice for forest guardians in Brazil, the slow pace of land recognition in Indonesia, and the legal battles over palm oil in Malaysia all demonstrate that conservation efforts divorced from human rights are fundamentally fragile and prone to failure. Conversely, the Sierra Leone carbon agreement, with its commitment to equitable revenue sharing and financial transparency, offers a powerful counter-narrative, proving that climate finance can be structured to empower, rather than exploit, local communities. The evidence is overwhelming: Indigenous Peoples are the most effective and cost-efficient stewards of the planet’s carbon sinks. Moving forward, the success of global forest conservation will not be measured by the volume of carbon credits traded or the size of government pledges, but by the tangible, legal recognition of Indigenous land tenure and the direct, reparative flow of finance to the communities on the front lines. Until the global community closes the vast gap between rhetoric and reality—between acknowledging the role of Indigenous Peoples and providing them with the resources and legal protection they require—the world’s forests will remain under threat, and the promise of a just transition will remain unfulfilled.

References

  1. Cautious win for Indigenous groups in Malaysia as palm oil firm pauses forest clearing

    Supports details on the palm oil dispute in Malaysian Borneo, the temporary moratorium by Urun Plantations, the communities involved (Penan and Kenyah), and the nature of the allegations.

  2. Sierra Leone communities sign carbon agreement based on carbon justice principles

    Provides details on the Sierra Leone carbon agreement, the 'carbon justice principles,' the 40-50% gross revenue share, the role of Namati, and the focus on mangrove protection in the Sherbro River Estuary.

  3. After 6 years, trial in Indigenous forest guardian killing pushed to 2026

    Verifies the names of the Indigenous forest guardians (Paulo Paulino Guajajara and Laércio Guajajara), the date of the attack (2019), the location (Arariboia Indigenous Territory), and the delay of the trial to 2026.

  4. How a ‘green gold rush’ in the Amazon led to dubious carbon deals on Indigenous lands

    Supports the description of the 'green gold rush' in the Amazon, the signing of dubious carbon and biodiversity credit contracts, and the warning from Funai about a second wave of proposals.

  5. New pledge, old problems as Indonesia’s latest Indigenous forest promise draws skepticism

    Verifies Indonesia's pledge to recognise 1.4 million hectares of Indigenous forests by 2029, the skepticism from advocates, the stalled Indigenous Rights Bill, and the slow recognition process.

  6. Justice Delayed: Amazon Forest Guardian Murder Trial Pushed to 2026

    Provides additional context on the delayed trial of Paulo Paulino Guajajara's killing, the outrage among the Guajajara people, and the broader pattern of impunity in Brazil.

  7. Indonesia forest pledge tests region's Indigenous promises

    Supports the details on the low percentage of mapped customary forests legally recognised in Indonesia (less than 2% of 23 million hectares) and the criticism that the 1.4 million hectare goal is 'low-hanging fruit.'

  8. How 'carbon cowboys' are cashing in on protected Amazon forest

    Supports the use of the term 'carbon cowboys' and the legal opinion that companies have no right to carbon credits on Indigenous territories without government approval.

  9. Indonesia Vows Forest Rights to Indigenous Groups—But Will It Deliver?

    Supports the context that Indonesia has the world's third-largest tropical rainforest and the criticism from the Indigenous Peoples' Alliance of the Archipelago (AMAN) about contradictory government policies.

  10. Brazil's Amazon carbon deal faces legal threat over Indigenous rights and land use

    Verifies the $180 million carbon deal in Pará state, the federal prosecutors' move to annul it, the illegal presale of credits, and the claims of lack of consultation with Indigenous and Quilombola communities.

  11. The 'carbon pirates' preying on Amazon's Indigenous communities

    Supports the use of the term 'carbon pirates' and the details about opaque, long-term contracts written in English that can last up to a century.

  12. Cautious win for Indigenous groups in Malaysia as palm oil firm pauses forest clearing : r/malaysia

    Confirms the lawsuit and complaint filed by Penan and Kenyah residents against Urun Plantations with Malaysia's sustainable palm oil certifier.

  13. Cautious win for Indigenous groups in Malaysia as palm oil firm pauses forest clearing.

    Confirms the temporary victory for Indigenous activists in central Sarawak state, Malaysian Borneo, and the agreement by Urun Plantations to a moratorium.

  14. Carbon Justice - Namati

    Supports the description of the 'carbon justice principles' as a grassroots movement and a breakthrough model for carbon agreements.

  15. Amazon Tribes Triumph In Landmark Carbon Credit Lawsuit In Colombia

    Verifies the July 2024 Colombian Constitutional Court ruling annulling a carbon credit deal in the Pira Parana territory due to lack of consent from six local tribes.

  16. What It Will Take to Achieve Equitable Economics for Indigenous and Local Community Nature Guardians

    Provides key statistics on the global disconnect: Indigenous Peoples govern 39% of global lands, manage 17% of forest carbon, receive less than 1% of climate finance, and the cost-effectiveness of tenure rights investments.

  17. Sierra Leone: Report reveals how some landowners have not agreed to controversial carbon offsets in a manner prescribed by law, incl. Co comments

    Provides the contrasting, negative example of a controversial carbon offset project in Sierra Leone where an investigation raised doubts about the legality of land agreements and the requirement for 60% family consent.

  18. Indigenous Communities Demand Immediate Halt to Deforestation by Urun Plantations

    Supports the specific details of the Malaysian dispute, including the contravention of the MSPO standard prohibiting natural forest conversion after 2019, the communities' blockades, and the company's subsidiary name (Sin Heng Chan Malaya Bhd).

  19. Amazonians call on leaders to heed link between land rights and climate change | Conservation and indigenous people | The Guardian

    Supports the claim that securing land rights for Indigenous communities is one of the most cost-effective ways to tackle climate change, citing a World Resources Institute report.

  20. The guardians of the Amazon who work without pay — or fear

    Provides statistics on the violence against Indigenous guards in Colombia (at least 70 killed in a decade) and the high percentage of intact forest cover (98%) within Indigenous territories there.